Subject:
|
Re: Plane Sailing? (was Re: 10024Red Baron)
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.reviews, lugnet.loc.au
|
Date:
|
Thu, 28 Aug 2003 09:23:54 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
10680 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.reviews, Richie Dulin wrote:
> In lugnet.reviews, Richie Dulin writes:
> > In lugnet.reviews, Kerry Raymond writes:
> > > Thanks for the review, Richie.
> > >
> > > > Very good. While much more swooshable than the 'Camel (it's a bit more
> > > > compact, and a whole lot sturdier)
> > >
> > > Here I would have to disagree. I don't find either of the Camel or the Baron
> > > to be particularly sturdy and hence not particularly swooshable.
> >
> > Hmmm... I may have to collect more data on this. Certainly my prelimary
> > data, based on medium speed swooshing at both full arm extension and half
> > arm extension, combined with several strafing runs (complete with machine
> > gun sound effects) against the now shipless Snottler crew, and some
> > emergency landings on the living room floor indicated the 'Baron was
> > infinitely more swooshable than the Camel.
> >
> > I'll report my findings (possibly with graphs and charts) in due course.
>
> I conducted some experiments last night.... see
> http://www.lugnet.com/loc/au/~1285/kites for details.
>
> No charts yet, though :-)
>
> Richie
Any plans on updating with data for the 10124 Wright Flyer?
Martin
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Plane Sailing? (was Re: 10024Red Baron)
|
| (...) Definitely. I don't have a Wright Flyer to test at the moment (donations cheerfully accepted, though!). As soon as I do, rest assured that I will subject it to the standard array of swooshability tests, and report the results. I do not have (...) (23 years ago, 28-Aug-03, to lugnet.reviews, lugnet.loc.au, FTX)
|
Message is in Reply To:
14 Messages in This Thread:
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
